Sweaty Ken

[Ani]

Why would he owe £104K?

 

He wouldn't have gone through winding up procedure in that case.

 

Ken is wily, he's clearly said "keep the Rugby takings as payment" then paid the 5K and released this statement. Makes Heathcote look worse than he already did.

You clearly do not know what the clearly means.

[Guest]

All that huffing and puffing over £5K - blimey

Half a week’s hard labour for Kenny

[Cheese]

Why would he owe £104K?

 

He wouldn't have gone through winding up procedure in that case.

 

Ken is wily, he's clearly said "keep the Rugby takings as payment" then paid the 5K and released this statement. Makes Heathcote look worse than he already did. 

 

What, and you think Heathcotes signed a non-disclosure agreement at the same time?

[Sweep]

You clearly do not know what the clearly means.

Clearly

[Eavesy]

Why would he owe £104K?

 

He wouldn't have gone through winding up procedure in that case.

 

Ken is wily, he's clearly said "keep the Rugby takings as payment" then paid the 5K and released this statement. Makes Heathcote look worse than he already did.

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2018/july/a-note-from-the-chairman6/

 

Despite numerous assurances, SCC have failed to repay the substantial amounts long overdue to us.

 

For the record, we have no problem in paying any monies we may currently owe to SCC/Heathcotes, provided they first of all pay us the amounts long overdue to us.

 

Easy to miss as iles just highlights the anti ken stuff.

[bwfc2003]

Iles says that he thinks the takings from the Rugby covered the rest that was outstanding. Bit naughty from Ken to try and make out this was all for £5K. It was over £100K. 

Marc Iles‏ @MarcIles

FollowingFollowing @MarcIles

More

Only assuming - but suggest the 5k figure mentioned in #bwfc statement was balance owed AFTER whatever was taken at the weekend's rugby. That means, for now, it's all square.

 

Big assumption that for Lies to make

[gonzo]

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2018/july/a-note-from-the-chairman6/

 

Despite numerous assurances, SCC have failed to repay the substantial amounts long overdue to us.

 

For the record, we have no problem in paying any monies we may currently owe to SCC/Heathcotes, provided they first of all pay us the amounts long overdue to us.

 

Easy to miss as iles just highlights the anti ken stuff.

Bang on.

 

Instead of a positive report on how the issue has been he resolved, he chooses to take a direct pop.

[Zico]

last week Iles said the winding up order was for 200k, and reckoned the rugby would bring up monies owed to Heathcotes to 300k

 

as a contractor, what did Heathcotes have to pay that means he only came away with 5k?!

[gonzo]

Depends if they rent the pitch at these events or are paid contractors by the club?

[Whites man]

 

45]

Marc Iles‏ @MarcIles

 

FollowingFollowing

@MarcIles

 

 

More

Only assuming - but suggest the 5k figure mentioned in #bwfc statement was balance owed AFTER whatever was taken at the weekend's rugby. That means, for now, it's all square.

Big assumption that for Lies to make

Have you been bumming with the giant font?

[bwfc2003]

Have you been bumming with the giant font?

I think I need to stop copying and pasting - it always goes tits up one way or another

[H]

And today's Oddschecker Free Bet Lottery winner is none other than Ken Anderson.

 

Can't go wrong can he ?

[burnden]

KA new column.

 

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2018/august/a-note-from-the-chairman3/

[Marc505]

Seen as I'm still in the camp of just being glad we're not watching a start-up club on Moss Bank Park every week, there's a bloke in charge here saying he'll never do business that puts the club in trouble again. Who am I to argue with that.

[jmjhb]

Ken said:

 

Today’s lack of transfer business is very disappointing and wasn’t for the lack of trying but as I have always maintained we shall never enter into a bidding war for a player whose price escalates beyond our own valuation.

 

Unfortunately, this has meant that we missed out on our striker targets ahead of Thursday’s deadline insofar as two have signed elsewhere and one has not moved. Obviously, this is very disappointing but, under my watch, this club shall never repeat the mistakes of the past and we will continue to operate on a commercial and financially prudent basis.

Edited August 9, 2018 by jmjhb

[Guest]

Today’s lack of transfer business is very disappointing and wasn’t for the lack of trying but as I have always maintained we shall never enter into a bidding war for a player whose price escalates beyond our own valuation.

 

Unfortunately, this has meant that we missed out on our striker targets ahead of Thursday’s deadline insofar as two have signed elsewhere and one has not moved. Obviously, this is very disappointing but, under my watch, this club shall never repeat the mistakes of the past and we will continue to operate on a commercial and financially prudent basis.

Kenny couldn’t have put it better himself

[tomski]

Seen as I'm still in the camp of just being glad we're not watching a start-up club on Moss Bank Park every week, there's a bloke in charge here saying he'll never do business that puts the club in trouble again. Who am I to argue with that.

If he just said. I tried pulling a full clubs pants down and they held their nerve and we have no money I'd respect him a lot more.

 

This we won't go above market value stuff sounds bollocks to me.

 

It's not been a bad window all in all and plenty left but why keep saying we are after 3 more etc. Will only serve to disappoint if not achieved?

[Marc505]

If he just said. I tried pulling a full clubs pants down and they held their nerve and we have no money I'd respect him a lot more.

 

This we won't go above market value stuff sounds bollocks to me.

 

It's not been a bad window all in all and plenty left but why keep saying we are after 3 more etc. Will only serve to disappoint if not achieved?

Agreed on that, putting numbers of targets and even naming Garner for example is only going to lead to meltdown if we don't fulfill it for whatever reason, especially with the way our lot are triggered on social media at the moment.

 

But I don't take it to heart as much as others. We still have a club, we've had two of the best final days in recent memory in the last 2 seasons and we've started this one with a great win against the odds and against the backdrop of a poor pre season. I'm a happy Wanderer, going on a massive blocking spree on Twitter has certainly helped!

[tomski]

Agree with a lot of what you say mate. I think the only bit I don't agree on is 'just being happy to have a club' that ship has sailed for me a while back.

 

We keep improving that will do for me. Its a new team and time will tell. It's started promisingly and I only really care about on the pitch and little for the stuff off it

[Tonge moor green jacket]

If Ken genuinely has refused to enter a bidding war then fine by me.

 

Perhaps a bit disappointing we couldn't get one sooner, but we don't know how parent clubs were playing it.

 

Move on.

[DazBob]

You clearly do not know what the clearly means.

Basically, he literally did. The little turd.

[MancWanderer]

1. This we won't go above market value stuff sounds bollocks to me.

 

2. It's not been a bad window all in all 

1. Sounds OK to me - I'm with him all the way on that - set your price and don't get bummed by the selling club. But get where you're coming from

 

2. Exceeded my expectations if I'm honest

[Boothy]

The market value is what people are willing to pay. If Ken can't afford £1 million, that's fine but doesn't seen like he is getting near the value that Ipswich put on Garner nor what Wigan were willing to cough up.

[Duck Egg]

The market value is what people are willing to pay. If Ken can't afford £1 million, that's fine but doesn't seen like he is getting near the value that Ipswich put on Garner nor what Wigan were willing to cough up.

The same thing could have happened with Magennis if there had been other serious parties interested. I'm sure Ipswich would have snatched our hands off at 16.55 if we were offering 500k for Garner and no one else was bidding

[Ani]

The market value is what people are willing to pay. If Ken can't afford £1 million, that's fine but doesn't seen like he is getting near the value that Ipswich put on Garner nor what Wigan were willing to cough up.

It is a bit misleading though. Transfer window creates a false value of a player.

 

It semantics but Ken could have said we will not pay more than we think a player is worth.

 

End of the day we are no longer going to spunk fees and wages on players which has to be a step in right direction.